HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #12341  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 4:04 AM
JerellO JerellO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 292
I love Horton Plaza
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12342  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 4:56 AM
mello's Avatar
mello mello is offline
Babylon falling
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,615
Horton blows, does Westfield actually own the land the mall sits on? It should be sold to a Chinese Billionaire for a mega mixed use ego project. Modern and sleek something to put SD on the map! Like Brickell City Center in Miami but with better design. Or maybe something like MGM City Center. We need something to really knock peoples socks off.
__________________
<<<<< I'm loving this economic "recovery" >>>>>
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12343  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 7:48 PM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
^ Hardly anyone would disagree that Horton Plaza needs at least a massive renovation. It served a good purpose in downtown for several years, but has failed to adapt to the changes in retail. Losing Nordstrom's clearly hurt and Macy's, like many anchor stores, isn't doing very well lately.

As far as I know Westfield owns the land. Then there are several other properties that would have to be worked around: Balboa Theatre, Horton Apartments and Golden West Hotel on Fourth; the Westin on First, etc. Personally I would love to see something that doesn't feel so claustrophobic as part of Horton Plaza's redevelopment, but other than that I'm keeping an open mind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12344  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 9:10 PM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California & Texas
Posts: 17,285
I think more playing off of the atmosphere, weather and lifestyle more like Paseo Nuevo in Santa Barbara would be plenty, it integrates well with a downtown and has a cool factor without being ostentatious.
__________________
I'm throwing my arms around Paris.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12345  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 11:04 PM
JerellO JerellO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 292
Maybe knocking down some walls to make the space more open and inviting??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12346  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 1:51 AM
Bertrice Bertrice is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: PB
Posts: 203
A sports arena downtown would be epic but it will never happen.

Last edited by Bertrice; Jan 22, 2017 at 4:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12347  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 3:33 AM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
You never know. AEG proposed an arena as part of the Seaport Village redevelopment. They seem eager to replace the old sports arena.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12348  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 7:43 PM
mello's Avatar
mello mello is offline
Babylon falling
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,615
Are you kidding me Bertrice if the NFL is not in San Diego we are by far the largest metro area in the US with only one major sports team. There is plenty of land at Tailgate park to fit in an arena where you wouldn't have to move the MTS busyard. I have already made a lot of phone calls and the NBA will definitely be looking at SD with a downtown arena. Sacramento's arena cost 530 million.
__________________
<<<<< I'm loving this economic "recovery" >>>>>
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12349  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 1:43 AM
JerellO JerellO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 292
They can't just build over the tracks?? Let the trains be underground? I think they did that with the original Penn station in NYC to build Madison Square garden.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12350  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 5:39 AM
HurricaneHugo's Avatar
HurricaneHugo HurricaneHugo is offline
Category Five
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,997
MLS targeting San Diego for Expansion:

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/spor...410864725.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12351  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 6:01 AM
CastleScott CastleScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento Ca/formerly CastleRock Co
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Hopefully one day we'll reform our land use regulations to make Japanese style regional train service a viable mode of transit between the two.
This would be great and I think something like this could happen in the I-5 corridor-since LA passed Measure M I believe something like this is almost around the corner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12352  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 6:02 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 884
Horton Plaza was built in the mid 1980s when downtown was still seedy and a center of porn shops and peep shows. That influenced the fortress-like design. I think any thriving downtown needs ratail, my hope is that HP stays a retail center and totally revamps and turns inside-out so you have street-level shopping.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12353  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 3:42 PM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by mello View Post
I have already made a lot of phone calls and the NBA will definitely be looking at SD with a downtown arena. Sacramento's arena cost 530 million.
^Awesome!

The Clippers lease at the Staples Center expires 2024. Staples will be 25 years old at that point. There's already some chatter in LA about the Clippers building a new arena potentially in the Westside, but imagine if SD put together a legitimate proposal to lure the Clips away, could get interesting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12354  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 6:51 PM
ChelseaFC's Avatar
ChelseaFC ChelseaFC is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,003


Artie Ojeda ‏@ArtieNBCSD
BREAKING: First look at rendering of MLS Stadium concept at Qualcomm Stadium site. Standing by for details. #nbc7

Three investors insist no taxpayer money. Must file for MLS application by Jan 31st.

plan would also include a stake in Mexican soccer league and bring a team to play here.

first step would be to develop 30 acres of River Park, no public expense. Would eventually total 55 (same as Measure D)

have had discussion with SDSU for joint stadium "quite hopeful" about working with university.

plan would also include "transit oriented development with student focused housing."

big challenge will be land acquisition. Land needs to be assessed for fair market value "to protect taxpayers."

SDSU asked to assume half of 200-million cost. Investors will then donate their half 5 years down the road.

investors say plan would relieve city of millions of dollars of negative financial liability.

investor group and city would split maintenance costs of proposed stadium.

Investors putting pressure squarly on city council. Will gather signatures and ask city to "direct adopt" plan.

investors say city must "direct adopt". If goes to a ballot vote, they will lose MLS bid.

HUGE point here. Investors say if city doesn't direct adopt (no public vote), they back out. It will be a deal breaker.

investors say city needs to act quickly because MLS application deadline is January 31st (yeah, real fast).

SDSU response: "Have had discussions, excited about reviewing complete proposal. Our priority is having a home for Aztec football and a plan for potential student housing and research facilities."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12355  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 7:19 PM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
Wow! FS Investors put this together quickly. So far it seems to be mostly good. Per the Union-Tribune, Gensler will have a site plan available in about two weeks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12356  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 7:48 PM
Nerv's Avatar
Nerv Nerv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 226
It will be interesting to see if anything gets done with the Q over the next couple of years. Lots of moving parts to that puzzle.

San Diego State is starting to look desperate. First in earlier remarks about the city giving them some land for a stadium at the Q if the Chargers left. Second with that second prop that got shot down by voters with the city giving them the land again if the Chargers left (hidden in a convention center expansion deal. Lol). Third by offering to kick in a 100 million to the new Charger stadium deal. Now that the teams gone they are all over the place with possible deals.

I've love to see them get a stadium deal here somewhere but if the voters didn't give in to the Chargers (who had a much higher value to more voters) what makes them think the same voters are going to be fine giving them valuable city lands or a super steep discount on it?

I remember one source trying to say that 160+ acres of mission valley land was only worth about 50 million dollars. What a bargain if you can buy a 3+ acre parcel in mission valley for a million dollars. Ha-ha.

Ugh. This is only the beginning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12357  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 9:34 PM
mwm991 mwm991 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 61
I read some of the comments on various local media sites, i.e the UT. I'm actually surprised, well kind not, that there are some negative responses to this proposal. People forgetting that there is actually no public money being spent on this. I think conservative folks just like moaning for the sake of moaning sometimes.
  • Buy the 166-acre site from the city at fair market value, as determined by a third-party. The site has been estimated at about $50 million in its present, unimproved condition;
  • Demolish 50-year-old Qualcomm Stadium, relieving the city of the annual upkeep of about $12 million and about $100 million in deferred maintenance costs. The city still owes about $28 million on outstanding bonds;
  • Set aside enough land for an NFL stadium to be built in the next five years if another city’s team wants to relocate and replace the Chargers, assuming the Chargers do not change their minds and want to move back;
  • Pay the projected cost, previously estimated at about $50 million, for a 55-acre San Diego River Park on the south side of the property;
  • Cover the costs of offsite traffic improvements associated with the development, as determined in an environmental analysis to accompany the citizens initiative, as well as onsite infrastructure site development costs with details to be laid out in coming weeks; and,
  • Invite other developers to build housing, including about 800 beds for SDSU students, 10 percent of the remainder for low- and moderate-income renters; office space for SDSU and other tenants, including a possible million-square-foot corporate headquarters; and related commercial and entertainment uses on the remainder of the property. The overall hope is to develop a transit-oriented development tied to the existing trolley line and one planned along Interstate 15.

To clarify you get a brand new mixed use stadium. An open door for an NFL team to return. Green space. Transport infrastructure improvements. Additional amenities for the local university. Opportunities for other various commercial use. Oh, and not a penny spent by the tax payer.

I am disgusted! Jesus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12358  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 9:37 PM
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 2,408
Demolish it, slice up the land into smaller properties, up zone it, and auction it off to the highest bidder.

I mean we are suffering from a housing crisis right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12359  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 5:55 AM
The Flying Dutchman The Flying Dutchman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 206
A measly 800 housing units on 55 acres? WTF. That's less than one house per acre. On a site with a trolley through it. Council better vote NO on this non-starter P.O.S. "Deal".
__________________
"A good walker does not rise dust" -Zen proverb
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12360  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 7:09 AM
Nerv's Avatar
Nerv Nerv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 226
I also wonder what the cost of razing the Q would cost too. In the past it seems to run about 15-25 million to take down a stadium but I seem to remember them wanting over 75 million to take down the Astrodome due to extra clean up costs.

Anyone know what the building height limits are in Mission Valley? I know they've proposed towers in the past in the 225-300 foot range but is there a current max limit there?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:22 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.